Estuaries and Coasts

, Volume 35, Issue 3, pp 727–742 | Cite as

The Effects of Integrated Marsh Management (IMM) on Salt Marsh Vegetation, Nekton, and Birds

  • Ilia RochlinEmail author
  • Mary-Jane James-Pirri
  • Susan C. Adamowicz
  • Mary E. Dempsey
  • Thomas Iwanejko
  • Dominick V. Ninivaggi


An integrated marsh management (IMM) project in an urbanized watershed on Long Island, New York, USA, aimed to mitigate salt marsh degradation and to reduce mosquito production by an innovative combination of restoration and open marsh water management methods. The grid ditch network at two treatment marshes was replaced with naturalized tidal channels and ponds. Effects of the hydrologic alterations were monitored utilizing a before–after–control–impact approach. The treatment marshes experienced a number of beneficial outcomes including a fourfold reduction in the invasive Phragmites australis and increased native vegetation cover in the most degraded portions of the marsh, increased abundance and diversity of marsh killifish and estuarine nekton species, higher shorebird and waterfowl densities, and increased avian species diversity. The successful implementation of IMM concept led to improved marsh health and diminished mosquito production. Therefore, this study may serve as a template for similar large-scale integrated salt marsh restoration projects.


Salt marsh restoration Salt marsh nekton Phragmites australis Spartina OMWM Integrated marsh management Salt marsh mosquitoes 



The integrated marsh management at WNWR was a collaborative effort between Suffolk County and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The findings and conclusions in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. We are indebted to Deborah Long, Patricia Martinkovic, and Michelle Williams (USFWS) for past and continuing support. We thank Alex Chmielewski, Andy Hinickle, Azucena Ponce, and Monica Williams (USFWS) for invaluable advice and assistance. Suffolk County Vector Control personnel provided vital support for the project: Margaret Kawalkowski (data entry and QA), Jerry Franklin (maintenance and bird data collection), Valentin Bulgak (GIS support), and field crews (sampling). We thank Walt Dawydiak and Kimberly Shaw (Suffolk County DHS) for excellent project coordination and management, and Phil DeBlasi (Suffolk County DHS) for help with field work. Josh Ver Hague and Craig Kessler (Ducks Unlimited) provided valuable help with design and field sampling. Kim Somers, Keith Brewer, and Elyse O’Brien (Cashin Associates) collected the field data and David Tonjes produced the draft project reports in 2003–2007. We are grateful to Paul Capotosto (CT DEP) for advice on the project design.

Supplementary material

12237_2011_9468_MOESM1_ESM.doc (130 kb)
ESM 1 (DOC 130 kb)
12237_2011_9468_MOESM2_ESM.doc (106 kb)
ESM 2 (DOC 106 kb)


  1. Adamowicz S.C., and C. T. Roman. 2002. Initial ecosystem response of salt marshes to ditch plugging and pool creation: Experiments at Rachel Carson National Wildlife Refuge (Maine). USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Narragansett, RI, US. Accessed 20 March 2011.
  2. Adamowicz, S.C., and C.T. Roman. 2005. New England salt marsh pools: A quantitative analysis of geomorphic and geographic features. Wetlands 25: 279–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Allen, D.M., S.S. Haertel-Borer, B.J. Milan, D. Bushek, and R.F. Dames. 2007. Geomorphological determinants of nekton use of intertidal salt marsh creeks. Marine Ecology Progress Series 329: 57–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson, M.J., R.N. Gorley, and K.R. Clarke. 2008. PERMANOVA+ for PRIMER: Guide to software and statistical methods. Plymouth, UK: Primer-E Ltd.Google Scholar
  5. Bart, D., and J. Hartman. 2003. The role of large rhizome dispersal and low salinity windows in the establishment of common reed (Phragmites australis) in salt marshes: New links to human activities. Estuaries and Coasts 26: 436–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bay, E. C. 1985. Other larvivorous fishes. In Biological control of mosquitoes (Bulletin 6), ed. H. Chapman, 18–24. American Mosquito Control Association: Mount Laurel, NJ.Google Scholar
  7. Benoit, L.K., and R.A. Askins. 1999. Impact of the spread of Phragmites on the distribution of birds in Connecticut tidal marshes. Wetlands 19: 194–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bourn, W.S., and C. Cottam. 1950. Some biological effects of ditching tidewater marshes. Washington, DC: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.Google Scholar
  9. Bromberg, K., and M. Bertness. 2005. Reconstructing New England salt marsh losses using historical maps. Estuaries and Coasts 28: 823–832.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Buchsbaum, R.N., J. Catena, E. Hutchins, and M.J. James-Pirri. 2006. Changes in salt marsh vegetation, Phragmites australis, and nekton in response to increased tidal flushing in a New England salt marsh. Wetlands 26: 544–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chambers, R., D. Osgood, D. Bart, and F. Montalto. 2003. Phragmites australis invasion and expansion in tidal wetlands: Interactions among salinity, sulfide, and hydrology. Estuaries and Coasts 26: 398–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chambers, R.M., L.A. Meyerson, and K. Saltonstall. 1999. Expansion of Phragmites australis into tidal wetlands of North America. Aquatic Botany 64: 261–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Clarke, J.A., B.A. Harrington, T. Hruby, and F.E. Wasserman. 1984. The effect of ditching for mosquito-control on salt-marsh use by birds in Rowley, Massachusetts. Journal of Field Ornithology 55: 160–180.Google Scholar
  14. Clarke, K.R. 1993. Non-parametric multivariate analyses of changes in community structure. Australian Journal of Ecology 18: 117–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Clarke, K.R., and R.N. Gorley. 2006. PRIMER v6 user manual/tutorial. Plymouth, UK: Primer-E.Google Scholar
  16. Corman, S.S., and C.T. Roman. 2011. Comparison of salt marsh creeks and ditches as habitat for nekton. Marine Ecology Progress Series 434: 57–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Crain, C.M., K.B. Gedan, and M. Dionne. 2009. Hydrologic alteration of New England tidal marshes by mosquito ditching and tidal restriction. In Human impacts on salt marshes: A global perspective, ed. B.R. Silliman, T. Grosholtz, and M.D. Bertness, 149–169. Berkley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  18. Crans, W.J. 1977. The status of Aedes sollicitans as an epidemic vector of Eastern equine encephalitis in New Jersey. Mosquito News 37: 85–89.Google Scholar
  19. Erwin, R.M., D.K. Dawson, D.B. Stotts, L.S. Mcallister, and P.H. Geissler. 1991. Open marsh water management in the Mid-Atlantic region—Aerial surveys of waterbird use. Wetlands 11: 209–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Erwin, R.M., C. Hatfield, M.A. Howe, and S.S. Klugman. 1994. Waterbird use of salt-marsh ponds created for open marsh water management. Journal of Wildlife Management 58: 516–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ewanchuk, P.J., and M.D. Bertness. 2004. The role of waterlogging in maintaining forb pannes in northern New England salt marshes. Ecology 85: 1568–1574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ferrigno, F., and D.M. Jobbins. 1968. Open marsh water management. Proceedings New Jersey Mosquito Control Association 55: 104–115.Google Scholar
  23. Ferrigno, F., L.G. MacNamara, and D.M. Jobbins. 1969. Ecological approach for improved management of coastal meadowlands. Proceedings New Jersey Mosquito Control Association 56: 188–202.Google Scholar
  24. Gedan, K.B., B.R. Silliman, and M.D. Bertness. 2009. Centuries of human-driven change in salt marsh ecosystems. Annual Review of Marine Science 1: 117–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Grant, G.S., and W.W. Kirby-Smith. 1998. The effect of open-marsh water management on summer bird populations on Topsail Island, North Carolina. Estuaries 21: 361–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. James-Pirri M.J., R. M. Erwin, and D. J. Prosser. 2008. US Fish and Wildlife Service (Region 5) Salt Marsh Study (2001–2006): An assessment of hydrologic alterations on salt marsh ecosystems along the Atlantic coast. USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center and University of Rhode Island. Accessed 30 March 2011.
  27. James-Pirri, M.J., H.S. Ginsberg, R.M. Erwin, and J. Taylor. 2009. Effects of open marsh water management on numbers of larval salt marsh mosquitoes. Journal of Medical Entomology 46: 1392–1399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. James-Pirri, M.J., C.T. Roman, and J.L. Swanson. 2010. A method to quantitatively sample nekton in salt-marsh ditches and small tidal creeks. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 139: 413–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. James-Pirri M.J., R. M. Erwin, D. J. Prosser, and J. D. Taylor. 2011. Responses of salt marsh ecosystems to mosquito control management practices along the Atlantic Coast (U.S.A.). Restoration Ecology 19. Published online (early view) doi: 10.1111/j.1526-100X.2010.00767.x
  30. Kent, M., and P. Coker. 1992. Vegetation description and analysis: A practical approach. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  31. Konisky, R.A., and D.M. Burdick. 2004. Effects of stressors on invasive and halophytic plants of New England salt marshes: A framework for predicting response to tidal restoration. Wetlands 24: 434–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Konisky, R.A., D.M. Burdick, M. Dionne, and H.A. Neckles. 2006. A regional assessment of salt marsh restoration and monitoring in the Gulf of Maine. Restoration Ecology 14: 516–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. McArdle, B.H., and M.J. Anderson. 2001. Fitting multivariate models to community data: A comment on distance-based redundancy analysis. Ecology 82: 290–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Meredith, W.H., and C.R. Lesser. 2007. An overview of open marsh water management (OMWM) in Delaware, 1979–2007. Proceedings New Jersey Mosquito Control Association 94: 55–69.Google Scholar
  35. Meredith, W.H., D.E. Saviekis, and C.J. Stachecki. 1985. Guidelines for ‘open marsh water management’ in Delaware's salt marshes. Wetlands 5: 133-119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mitsch, W.J., and J.G. Gosselink. 2000. Tidal salt marshes. In Wetlands, 261–305. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  37. Pepper, M.A., and W.G. Shriver. 2010. Effects of open marsh water management on the reproductive success and nesting ecology of seaside sparrows in tidal marshes. Waterbirds 33: 381–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Posey, M.H., and H.H. Anson. 1991. Complex predator–prey interactions within an estuarine benthic community. Ecology 75: 2155–2169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Raposa, K.B. 2008. Early ecological responses to hydrologic restoration of a tidal pond and salt marsh complex in Narragansett Bay, Rhode Island. Journal of Coastal Research 55: 180–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Raposa, K.B., and C.T. Roman. 2003. Using gradients in tidal restriction to evaluate nekton community responses to salt marsh restoration. Estuaries 26: 98–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Raposa, K.B., C.T. Roman, and J.F. Heltshe. 2003. Monitoring nekton as a bioindicator in shallow estuarine habitats. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 81: 239–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rice, W.R. 1989. Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution 43: 223–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rochlin, I., M.E. Dempsey, S.R. Campbell, and D.V. Ninivaggi. 2008. Salt marsh as Culex salinarius larval habitat in coastal New York. Journal of the American Mosquito Control Association 24: 359–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rochlin I., T. Iwanejko, M. Dempsey, and D. Ninivaggi. 2009. Geostatistical evaluation of integrated marsh management impact on mosquito vectors using before-after-control-impact (BACI) design. International Journal of Health Geographics 8:35.
  45. Roman, C.T., K.B. Raposa, S.C. Adamowicz, M.J. James-Pirri, and J.G. Catena. 2002. Quantifying vegetation and nekton response to tidal restoration of a New England salt marsh. Restoration Ecology 10: 450–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Roman, C.T., W.A. Niering, and R.S. Warren. 1984. Salt marsh vegetation change in response to tidal restriction. Environmental Management 8: 141–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Saltonstall, K. 2002. Cryptic invasion by a non-native genotype of the common reed, Phragmites australis, into North America. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 99: 2445–2449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Seigel A., C. Hatfield, and J. M. Hartman. 2005. Avian response to restoration of urban tidal marshes in the Hackensack Meadowlands, New Jersey. Urban Habitats 3.
  49. Smith, S.M., C.T. Roman, M.J. James-Pirri, K. Chapman, J. Portnoy, and E. Gwilliam. 2009. Responses of plant communities to incremental hydrologic restoration of a tide-restricted salt marsh in southern New England (Massachusetts, USA). Restoration Ecology 17: 606–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Stewart-Oaten, A., W.W. Murdoch, and K.R. Parker. 1986. Environmental impact assessment: Pseudo-replication in time? Ecology 67: 929–940.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Suffolk County. 2009. Wertheim National Wildlife Refuge water management demonstration project data reports. Accessed 4 Jan 2012.
  52. Warren, R.S., P.E. Fell, R. Rozsa, A.H. Brawley, A.C. Orsted, E.T. Olson, V. Swamy, and W.A. Niering. 2002. Salt marsh restoration in Connecticut: 20 years of science and management. Restoration Ecology 10: 497–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Weinstein, M. 2007. Linking restoration ecology and ecological restoration in estuarine landscapes. Estuaries and Coasts 30: 365–370.Google Scholar
  54. Wolfe, R.J. 1996. Effects of open marsh water management on selected tidal marsh resources: A review. Journal of the American Mosquito Control Association 12: 701–712.Google Scholar
  55. Wolfe, R.J., and P. Capotosto. 1998. Integrated Marsh Management: A holistic approach to wetlands management in Connecticut. Proceedings Northeastern Mosquito Control Association 44: 13.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Coastal and Estuarine Research Federation 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ilia Rochlin
    • 1
    • 5
    Email author
  • Mary-Jane James-Pirri
    • 2
  • Susan C. Adamowicz
    • 3
  • Mary E. Dempsey
    • 4
  • Thomas Iwanejko
    • 1
  • Dominick V. Ninivaggi
    • 1
  1. 1.Suffolk County Department of Public WorksDivision of Vector ControlYaphankUSA
  2. 2.Graduate School of OceanographyUniversity of Rhode IslandNarragansettUSA
  3. 3.Rachel Carson National Wildlife Refuge, USFWSWellsUSA
  4. 4.Suffolk County Department of Environment and EnergyYaphankUSA
  5. 5.Division of Vector ControlSuffolk County DPWYaphankUSA

Personalised recommendations